Proposes a transformation pathway for biodiversity conservation, suggesting integrated strategies for ecological resilience, social prosperity, and justice.
Decades of conservation action have failed to stem biodiversity loss, stimulating heated debates over which conservation strategies are the most effective. Do we focus on preserving sufficient wilderness, maintaining services from nature for societal well‐being, or protecting vulnerable socioecologies from injustice? Despite the apparent rivalry between these three agendas, their underlying values—ecological resilience, social prosperity, and freedom from harm—are not mutually exclusive. In this study, the X‐curve framework is used to help imagine a transformation pathway for a future that not only protects but also systemically advances all three of these goals. Doing so demonstrates the potential complementarity between approaches, as well as the need for coordinated engagement with other transformative agendas, such as environmental justice movements. Outcomes can be supported through decentralized environmental governance and a more equitable political economy, highlighting that the protection of land and land rights is only the first step.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Camille PA Venier‐Cambron (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: